Helen Thomas Retires Effective Immediately

[Magda Hassan]

No Helen I am Jewish fwiw. Just don't support the party line. I only suggested the Egyptian take over because they still exist while the Moabs and Caananite etc have gone in history. Not too sure about the Palestinian origins. Just one of many tribes that landed in the bloody hell hole. Actually a fair few would be of Jewish origins too. Converts to Christianity and later Islam. Can't stop love or lust. Indian Jews don't look the way they do from eating curry.

[Magda Hassan]

Helen Thomas was Wrong — But You’d Think She’d Killed 9 People or Destroyed Our Coastline



So who says Obama can’t show anger? Helen Thomas sure made him angry.
After video hit YouTube of eighty-nine year old reporter, Helen Thomas, telling an interviewer that Israelis should “get out of Palestine” and go back to Poland and Germany and other places, the white House issued an immediate condemnation. Reprehensible was their word. In the ritual flagellation that’s followed, one can’t help thinking that the grande dame of the White House press corps would have gotten less grief if she’d purposely cheated the financial system and took taxpayer money to recover, or killed eleven and destroyed an ecosystem in an avoidable deep water drilling disaster, or let 29 men die in a push for more mining profits. Or shot nine men dead — in the head — in international waters.

Thomas’s comments were regrettable, and she’s regretted them and she has resigned her post with Hearst because of them. Which is more than can be said of most pundits who say hateful things in the money media.
The White House Correspondents Association showed more fury in 24 hours towards Thomas than they’ve ever shown towards the journos who, unlike Thomas, softballed Bush for eight straight years and passed on government lies that lead us into the Iraq invasion. Sometimes one’s strengths are also one’s weaknesses. Thomas was — and remains — a bulldog. She doggedly questioned President Bush about war and torture at a time when the rest of the press rolled over. In return they appear more shocked by a comment — albeit laced with 70 years of horrific history, it’s true — than they are by the deaths of flesh-and-blood humans.
Thomas’s crime wasn’t just antisemitism — it was antisemitism in defense of Palestine. That’s the true source of the outrage. The outrage that Obama and Biden and most other U.S. officials, to say nothing of the majority of the press corps, can’t seem to find for others.
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010...hos-right/

[Peter Lemkin]

What is missed....and not unintentionally by the agents of disinformation, is that the ONLY reporter willing to ask the hard questions - that put the PTB to the wall was removed....this is not an accident..but the Project For A New [Fascist] America. News conferences will next start with a 'Pledge of Allegiance'.... A very low point in a low point...bringing us to a new nadir of political and ethical morality....."going down?".....

[Ed Jewett]

June 08, 2010

A Friendly Note to Many of Israel's Defenders

From the sickeningly rancid, foully infected underbelly of the Outraged Furor! over Helen Thomas's violation of The Sacred Rules Concerning What Is Permissible to Say About Israel, there is one "argument" offered by Israel's defenders that might be among my favorite debating tactics of recent years.

In their efforts to prove beyond all dispute that Thomas is a vicious anti-Semite who loathes every Jew who has ever lived and longs for the day when every single one of them is dead, these defenders of notably horrifying and murderous State terrorism gleefully spit out: "It's just like saying, 'Hey, all you Black Americans! Go back to Africa!' And we all know what it would mean if someone said that!"

I've heard and read this a huge number of times in the last several days. I am forced to admit that the comparison is staggering in its power. It makes the point with concision, and the historic parallels are overwhelming. To review briefly, and despite the very painful familiarity of these facts: significant numbers of Africans voluntarily, indeed enthusiastically, migrated westward and took over large parts of the eastern seaboard of what was then the United States beginning in the mid-1800s. They were able to do this because they had the unending support in a multitude of forms of the most powerful Nation-States of the time. The Africans claimed that a special dispensation from ... well, something or other ... ordained that the land mass designated by the name "United States" was uniquely theirs. The Nation-States that made possible the Africans' conquest and domination agreed.

In the ensuing century and a half, the Africans slaughtered most of those they found living in the United States, beginning in the eastern states and then steadily continuing their campaign of murder and destruction across the continent. The few survivors fled further and further west. The Africans inexorably pursued them, all still with the backing of certain immensely powerful Nation-States. Eventually, the Africans drove the remaining previous inhabitants of the United States into just three or four very small areas in (what were then called) Arizona and New Mexico. From that point on and continuing to the present, the Africans forbade virtually anyone and anything from moving into or out of these impossibly restricted areas. Although it is rarely talked about or admitted, people will eventually acknowledge, when pressed, that the Americans forced to remain in these concentration camps must endure conditions that are among the most nightmarish on earth.

Given this history, well-known to every young school child in the world, it is indeed exactly the same to say that the Israelis should "get out of Palestine" and to demand that the Africans should "get out of the United States." The argument is unanswerable to a degree that causes me profound embarrassment and distress. I greatly resent having the pathetic shabbiness of my views revealed in this manner.

But perhaps I might offer an exceedingly minor piece of unsolicited and doubtless unwanted advice to many of those who regularly defend Israel's systematic State terrorism, extended entirely free of charge and only because I'm a hell of a sweet guy:

You don't need to work at making yourselves stupid. Seriously.

On a related note: it is not "brave" or "courageous" of you in the slightest degree to side with unanswerable power, or to act as enforcers of permissible speech. To the contrary, that decision is one of the least courageous choices imaginable. It is also remarkably, astonishingly ... well, stupid. But I've told you that you don't need to work at that.

I have a number of other, considerably more complex points I want to make about this Helen Thomas episode. I'll get to all that in the next day or so. But I came across this particular "argument" several times again this morning. So I wanted to get this out of the way.

For me, one of the more gut-wrenching aspects of today's monstrous culture, a culture that kills each and every manifestation of empathy, understanding and compassion with relentlessly systematic determination, is the combination of unending destruction, cruelty, violence and murder with the most abysmally wretched depths of stupidity.

In certain respects, that is my own personal nightmare. And so, so many people work with such diligence to make it real every single day. They needn't work at that, either, and I desperately wish they would stop.

Assuredly, they will not.



posted by Arthur Silber at 11:32 AM

[Anthony Marsh]

Did you ever read the Bible or a history book? That's where the ancient tribes of Israel ended up. Muslims invaded Jewish territory and built their monuments on the destroyed remains of Jewish monuments. The Jews were already there when the Romans conquered the entire area and kicked them out. Islam was a late-comer in 610.

So now with the insults, eh? Yes I do know a little about history. Question is do you?

As this flash map shows, there were many others who called that land their home--before and after the Jews. It is not exclusively the Jewish homeland, as some would have us believe.


http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photo...f_war.html

I never said exclusively. But even you could see when the map flashed Kingdom of Israel. Notice how large it was and how ancient. Maybe it flashed by too quickly for me to notice, but I never saw it say Kingdom of Palestine. Where exactly where was this mythical Kingdom of Palestine?
BTW, for those who think that Egypt was there first, yes because they conquered and enslaved the Jews.
"Let my people go." See, it does help to know the Bible.

[Anthony Marsh]

June 08, 2010

A Friendly Note to Many of Israel's Defenders

From the sickeningly rancid, foully infected underbelly of the Outraged Furor! over Helen Thomas's violation of The Sacred Rules Concerning What Is Permissible to Say About Israel, there is one "argument" offered by Israel's defenders that might be among my favorite debating tactics of recent years.

In their efforts to prove beyond all dispute that Thomas is a vicious anti-Semite who loathes every Jew who has ever lived and longs for the day when every single one of them is dead, these defenders of notably horrifying and murderous State terrorism gleefully spit out: "It's just like saying, 'Hey, all you Black Americans! Go back to Africa!' And we all know what it would mean if someone said that!"

I've heard and read this a huge number of times in the last several days. I am forced to admit that the comparison is staggering in its power. It makes the point with concision, and the historic parallels are overwhelming. To review briefly, and despite the very painful familiarity of these facts: significant numbers of Africans voluntarily, indeed enthusiastically, migrated westward and took over large parts of the eastern seaboard of what was then the United States beginning in the mid-1800s. They were able to do this because they had the unending support in a multitude of forms of the most powerful Nation-States of the time. The Africans claimed that a special dispensation from ... well, something or other ... ordained that the land mass designated by the name "United States" was uniquely theirs. The Nation-States that made possible the Africans' conquest and domination agreed.

In the ensuing century and a half, the Africans slaughtered most of those they found living in the United States, beginning in the eastern states and then steadily continuing their campaign of murder and destruction across the continent. The few survivors fled further and further west. The Africans inexorably pursued them, all still with the backing of certain immensely powerful Nation-States. Eventually, the Africans drove the remaining previous inhabitants of the United States into just three or four very small areas in (what were then called) Arizona and New Mexico. From that point on and continuing to the present, the Africans forbade virtually anyone and anything from moving into or out of these impossibly restricted areas. Although it is rarely talked about or admitted, people will eventually acknowledge, when pressed, that the Americans forced to remain in these concentration camps must endure conditions that are among the most nightmarish on earth.

Given this history, well-known to every young school child in the world, it is indeed exactly the same to say that the Israelis should "get out of Palestine" and to demand that the Africans should "get out of the United States." The argument is unanswerable to a degree that causes me profound embarrassment and distress. I greatly resent having the pathetic shabbiness of my views revealed in this manner.

But perhaps I might offer an exceedingly minor piece of unsolicited and doubtless unwanted advice to many of those who regularly defend Israel's systematic State terrorism, extended entirely free of charge and only because I'm a hell of a sweet guy:

You don't need to work at making yourselves stupid. Seriously.

On a related note: it is not "brave" or "courageous" of you in the slightest degree to side with unanswerable power, or to act as enforcers of permissible speech. To the contrary, that decision is one of the least courageous choices imaginable. It is also remarkably, astonishingly ... well, stupid. But I've told you that you don't need to work at that.

I have a number of other, considerably more complex points I want to make about this Helen Thomas episode. I'll get to all that in the next day or so. But I came across this particular "argument" several times again this morning. So I wanted to get this out of the way.

For me, one of the more gut-wrenching aspects of today's monstrous culture, a culture that kills each and every manifestation of empathy, understanding and compassion with relentlessly systematic determination, is the combination of unending destruction, cruelty, violence and murder with the most abysmally wretched depths of stupidity.

In certain respects, that is my own personal nightmare. And so, so many people work with such diligence to make it real every single day. They needn't work at that, either, and I desperately wish they would stop.

Assuredly, they will not.



posted by Arthur Silber at 11:32 AM

Yes, the comparison is abt in that it would be racist for a white person to tell black people to go back to Africa. But you overlook the fact that several black leaders led a back to Africa movement. Ever hear of Liberia? And even Abraham Lincoln endorsed the idea.

[Mark Stapleton]

You can if you try! And also with the Boer trek in South Africa.

Not even if you try.

Here you go: all modern humans originated in Africa. Thus the boer trekkers were returning to their ancestral homeland, as the Jews did in Israel. The difference is 2,000 years vs. oh let's call it 2 million just for the sake of a round number. But in the lifetime of an individual, is there a difference between 20 generations ago and 2,000 generations ago? Of course not.

That doesn't make the colonisation of Palestine analogous to that of the Americas I'm afraid.

[Mark Stapleton]

Gandhi also thought the Czechs would do best to sacrifice themselves before the onslaught of the Third Reich and Einstein wasn't much interested in politics, but did enjoy Yiddish music from what I hear.

Yes but Ghandi was still opposed to the formation of the Jewish State, regardless of whatever else he advocated.

The Zionists tried to change his mind--to no avail.

Gandhi was arguing for the rights of Muslims in the Dar el Salaam for political reasons, to placate the Mulsim minority and separatists inside British India in order to create preconditions for a more unified state, and to draw Islamic activism against British colonialism to his side.

Perhaps that's right but no matter which which way you slice it or dice it, Gandhi was opposed to the establishment of Israel. Fact.

[Mark Stapleton]

Did you ever read the Bible or a history book? That's where the ancient tribes of Israel ended up. Muslims invaded Jewish territory and built their monuments on the destroyed remains of Jewish monuments. The Jews were already there when the Romans conquered the entire area and kicked them out. Islam was a late-comer in 610.

So now with the insults, eh? Yes I do know a little about history. Question is do you?

As this flash map shows, there were many others who called that land their home--before and after the Jews. It is not exclusively the Jewish homeland, as some would have us believe.


http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photo...f_war.html

I never said exclusively. But even you could see when the map flashed Kingdom of Israel. Notice how large it was and how ancient. Maybe it flashed by too quickly for me to notice, but I never saw it say Kingdom of Palestine. Where exactly where was this mythical Kingdom of Palestine?
BTW, for those who think that Egypt was there first, yes because they conquered and enslaved the Jews.
"Let my people go." See, it does help to know the Bible.

That was the point of the flash map. Of course Jews have an historical link with the land now known as Israel (but more correctly occupied Palestine).

However, Jews alone do not have that historical link. Many others called that land home throughout history and that includes the Palestinians, who were there in 1948. To deny their claim, or as some goose on EF said recently, 'they were from everywhere and nowhere', is plain racist crap.

The Zionist ideology denies that historical link to anyone else except the Jews, which is why Zionism is inherently racist. They want it all for themselves and are unwilling to share it. The expansion of the settlements, being done despite opposition from Israel's enemies and friends alike, is merely ethnic cleansing by stealth.

If Zionism demands the right of return for all Jews, then a similar right must be granted to the Palestinians dispossessed by Israel's creation. Until that happens, Hamas has every right to refuse to recognise the 'Jewish state'.

As for the bible, the Zionists take the old testament literally. That's why there is so much trouble in the region.

The Jews are not God's chosen people. Until they realise that, and stop believing they have a God given right to slaughter others, there will always be trouble, especially for them.

[Anthony Marsh]

Did you ever read the Bible or a history book? That's where the ancient tribes of Israel ended up. Muslims invaded Jewish territory and built their monuments on the destroyed remains of Jewish monuments. The Jews were already there when the Romans conquered the entire area and kicked them out. Islam was a late-comer in 610.

So now with the insults, eh? Yes I do know a little about history. Question is do you?

As this flash map shows, there were many others who called that land their home--before and after the Jews. It is not exclusively the Jewish homeland, as some would have us believe.


http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photo...f_war.html

I never said exclusively. But even you could see when the map flashed Kingdom of Israel. Notice how large it was and how ancient. Maybe it flashed by too quickly for me to notice, but I never saw it say Kingdom of Palestine. Where exactly where was this mythical Kingdom of Palestine?
BTW, for those who think that Egypt was there first, yes because they conquered and enslaved the Jews.
"Let my people go." See, it does help to know the Bible.

That was the point of the flash map. Of course Jews have an historical link with the land now known as Israel (but more correctly occupied Palestine).

However, Jews alone do not have that historical link. Many others called that land home throughout history and that includes the Palestinians, who were there in 1948. To deny their claim, or as some goose on EF said recently, 'they were from everywhere and nowhere', is plain racist crap.

The Zionist ideology denies that historical link to anyone else except the Jews, which is why Zionism is inherently racist. They want it all for themselves and are unwilling to share it. The expansion of the settlements, being done despite opposition from Israel's enemies and friends alike, is merely ethnic cleansing by stealth.

If Zionism demands the right of return for all Jews, then a similar right must be granted to the Palestinians dispossessed by Israel's creation. Until that happens, Hamas has every right to refuse to recognise the 'Jewish state'.

As for the bible, the Zionists take the old testament literally. That's why there is so much trouble in the region.

The Jews are not God's chosen people. Until they realise that, and stop believing they have a God given right to slaughter others, there will always be trouble, especially for them.

You touched on a couple of points I made, but did not answer each point adequately.
Again, many empires ruled that territory, but you did not point out when and where there was a Kingdom of Palestine, like Israel. It just appears that the Palestinians were always ruled by various empires, like the Bedouins. That doesn't make them an independent nation historically.
Yes Zionism is inherently racist. It stems from a self-serving misreading of the Bible. God never that he gave those tribes all of the land. He said, "I give you THIS land" referring to a specific small area, not all of the Middle East. Israel has expanded it militarily. Yes God ordered the Jews to kill their neighbors, but it was always specific enemies and Zionist misinterprets that as perpetual permission to kill all non Jews. This is one of the things that Jesus was trying to change.
It's not the goals per se which makes Zionism so dangerous. It's their belief that the ends justifies the means. Fanaticism about any belief is usually what causes the trouble.
Certain Muslims have exactly the same problem from the other side. You don't have to like your neighbor to respect his rights. Hamas are fanatics about their beliefs.